Philip Hodgetts’ unique blend of business and production knowledge gives him insight into the current state of the industry, and a remarkably accurate look forward. Here he shares his thinking, and points to articles of interest from other sites, with context as to why they're interesting.

In a comment on my career disasters’ post (on Facebook) it was pointed out that ageism is playing a big part in why so many highly skilled people have difficulty regaining employment. It’s absolutely not fair, but it’s also incredibly short sighted.

In not retaining highly experienced people in our industry – letting them “age out” so to speak – we lose their combined knowledge and insight. Yes, new people coming into the industry might be able to learn the day-to-day tasks they need, but with years of experience comes an insight that is hard to describe.

When you’ve been through multiple changes of technology; hundreds of hours of troubleshooting and bug reporting; and years of experience dealing with all kinds of people you bring an insight that the new employee simply will not have.

You will be quicker at finding – and fixing – problems that arise. You’ll be MUCH BETTER at making sure those problems do not arise, simply because you’ve been there and got the T shirt. You’ve learnt from your own and other people’s mistakes and know how to avoid them.

And obsolete knowledge can still be insightful. For example, very technique I used tweaking animations on my old Amiga so they’d fit in memory, was useless just five years later when memory became abundant. But when it came to making low bandwidth animation for the early Internet, I had a bunch of techniques at hand to work with.

The only reason to “let” (i.e. force) people to “age out” is if they have failed to keep current with technology and technique. I like to think those people are rare.

I have zero idea how to solve the short sightedness of employers who won’t even grant an interview because of birth year. I’ve had exactly one employer that wasn’t a company I controlled, across my entire career. Even that – Head Technician in a touring theater venue – was without direct supervision. I have gone my entire career without adult supervision, so it’s perhaps a wise employer that would shy clear!

That was the first job I applied for against a competitive field. I have not applied for a second job, so I have zero advice to offer.

I am a big believer in the need for failure in innovation. If I’d been more successful at some of my earlier career directions, I certainly wouldn’t have needed to push forward.

I wish that was a rhetorical question and I was about to propose an answer. Sadly I’m not. At best we have an illusion of permanence, but our business lives can change in an instant. Usually without us being involved in the decision!

There are the obvious examples. The other cast and crew on Rosanne had their livelihood jerked out from below, through no fault of their own.

The production crew on Parts Unknown who face a very uncertain future, as do many at Zero Point Zero Productions.

One acquaintance lost business and home in quick succession and has left LA. Another had a decent, well paying job at a major studio until downsizing eliminated the position. An unfortunate bout of ill health without the cover of employer insurance, and within 2 years he was effectively homeless. Another laid off from another studio job is finding a home for their many talents and abilities.

I think I mentioned it on the show, but one of the most important things when getting introduced to a new group: Get a GREAT introduction. As long as you don’t every disprove the introduction that’s how people will think of you. With that in mind #14 Say what you can resonated with me.

Design is much more than the way things look. It encompasses every aspect of every interaction with the device, object or software package you’re using. Josh Clark published a talk he gave on behalf of his design studio big medium, that is focused on design in the era of the algorithm, or Artificial Intelligence.

It’s a very long and deep article, well worth the read if you design anything at all. I found it very relevant as we are currently designing our most complex and powerful app. Read on for a list of the topics.

A new article in Scientific American – Why Creativity is a Numbers Game – hits on themes that resonate with me. The point of the article is that even famous creators like Edison and Steve Jobs have many failures as well as their prominent successes. In fact, even Shakespeare was remarkably inconsistent in his creative output.

Problematically, most of us are scared of failure, or at least want to avoid it, so we never get past the point where we suck – always at the beginning – and start to improve.

The final post in my series rising out of a recent Digital Production BuZZ segment with Larry Jordan and Michael Horton. Larry asked one final, very important question.

Larry Jordan: Because we are charged with delivering our projects on time and on budget, at what point should we resist change, like not being too close to the bleeding edge, and at what point should we embrace change?